SO2 policy and input substitution under spatial monopoly
Following the U.S. Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, electric utilities dramatically increased their utilization of low-sulfur coal from the Powder River Basin (PRB). Recent studies indicate that railroads hauling PRB coal exercise a substantial degree of market power and that relative price changes in the mining and transportation sectors were contributing factors to the observed pattern of input substitution. This paper asks the related question: To what extent does more stringent SO2 policy stimulate input substitution from high-sulfur coal to low-sulfur coal when railroads hauling low-sulfur coal exercise spatial monopoly power? The question underpins the effectiveness of incentive-based environmental policies given the essential role of market performance in input, output, and abatement markets in determining the social cost of regulation. Our analysis indicates that environmental regulation leads to negligible input substitution effects when clean and dirty inputs are highly substitutable and the clean input market is mediated by a spatial monopolist.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 23-44, July.
- Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1972. "Monopoly Output Under Alternative Spatial Pricing Techniques," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(4), pages 705-713, September.
- Caputo, Michael R. & Wilen, James E., 1995. "Optimality conditions and comparative statics for horizon and endpoint choices in optimal control theory," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 351-369.
- Ellerman, A. Denny & Montero, Juan-Pablo, 1998. "The Declining Trend in Sulfur Dioxide Emissions: Implications for Allowance Prices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 26-45, July.
- Meghan R. Busse & Nathaniel O. Keohane, 2007. "Market effects of environmental regulation: coal, railroads, and the 1990 Clean Air Act," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1159-1179, December.
- Curtis Carlson & Dallas Burtraw & Maureen Cropper & Karen L. Palmer, 2000.
"Sulfur Dioxide Control by Electric Utilities: What Are the Gains from Trade?,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(6), pages 1292-1326, December.
- Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Cropper, Maureen & Carlson, Curtis, 1998. "Sulfur-Dioxide Control By Electric Utilities: What Are the Gains from Trade?," Discussion Papers dp-98-44-rev, Resources For the Future.
- Carlson, Curtis & Burtraw, Dallas & Cropper, Maureen & Palmer, Karen L., 1998. "Sulfur dioxide control by electric utilities : what are the gains from trade?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1966, The World Bank.
- Juan-Pablo Montero, 1999. "Voluntary Compliance with Market-Based Environmental Policy: Evidence from the U.S. Acid Rain Program," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(5), pages 998-1033, October.
- Granitz, Elizabeth & Klein, Benjamin, 1996. "Monopolization by "Raising Rivals' Costs": The Standard Oil Case," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-47, April.
- Peter C. Reiss & Matthew W. White, 2005. "Household Electricity Demand, Revisited," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 853-883.
- Shelby Gerking & Stephen F. Hamilton, 2008. "What Explains the Increased Utilization of Powder River Basin Coal in Electric Power Generation?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 933-950.
- Wolak, Frank A. & Kolstad, Charles D., 1988. "Measuring relative market power in the Western U.S. coal market using Shapley values," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 293-314, December.
- Robert W. Hahn, 1984. "Market Power and Transferable Property Rights," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 99(4), pages 753-765. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)